March 23 2026
What You Missed At NEMA
By Derrick Hiebert
This year's NEMA mid-year felt unique for several reasons: the continued absence of our FEMA partners, the conversations focused on state-led programs as potential replacements for FEMA-led ones, what felt like a higher number of contractors relative to state representatives than normal... It was hard-hitting and provided a great chance to discuss what may be coming down the pike and the future of hazard mitigation as we know it!
Inside the "Leaked" FEMA Council Report
The FEMA Council report was "leaked"; it was an older version from December, but it revealed what had been previously reported about a "parametric" style disaster recovery system, with 50% cuts to FEMA staff, and some odd changes to HMGP.
It also maintained most of the response ecosystem and increased Individual Assistance for survivors with more losses, while reducing it for those with minor losses. The NFIP privatization ideas were also included, though paired with a focus on codes and standards. Many of the ideas within the report will require legislative approval to be accomplished. It does look like we will get a full report at some point, hopefully sooner rather than later!
The Congressional Outlook
The Congressional staff from Senate and House committees joined us to share about legislative reform. To put it frankly, it doesn't look like there is much of a path for FEMA reform in the near future from Congress thanks to Senate Committee Chair Paul. This is unfortunate as the FEMA Act has a lot of good ideas in it… Hopefully, there will be some interest moving forward.
The good news is we are getting a new DHS Secretary and FEMA Administrator.
I know we all know this, but NEMA was full of different ideas and names for the new FEMA F1. I have my own hopes for who it will be, but I advise against gambling in the prediction markets over this one!
The Rise of State-Led Programs
Many states are moving forward on new state IA, PA, and HM programs. Several states, such as Oregon and Pennsylvania have created or are creating new programs to invest in resilience and recovery. It is great to see both individual and state efforts leading the chase on these programs.
My advice if you are one of those states is:
-
Create a program meant to serve your state, not just a smaller version of FEMA's programs (though do learn those lessons!)
-
Start with your program's outcomes, develop a functioning pilot, and only then write policy. At FEMA, crafting programs from soup to nuts without testing them out could lead to negative outcomes because, once finalized, policy and practice are difficult to change.
-
Be ready to make your program a success no matter what FEMA does. Make it able to pull in dollars from everywhere and direct them to your priorities.
-
Consider the whole of the government, not just one piece. Our field is multi-disciplinary, our problem multi-faceted, our solutions need to be multi-agency/multi-
jurisdiction by design.
-
Learn from the infrastructure world and think programmatically. Things like three year periods of performance don't make sense when talking about infrastructure. Funding is not single-source and may come from grants, bonds, or user fees. Design and planning are critical to success.
-
We do not fail in our missions because of technical shortcomings, we fail because of organizational problems. How we organize, including how we manage authorities and resources and who can say yes and no, largely drives whether we can be successful.
The "Turnover" Continues
The turnover in our profession continues across the board. Lots of retirements have happened or are on the docket for the next year or two. Lots of up and coming mitigators have been forced out of our profession due to lack of job availability. Expect lots of new relationship building over the next few years, as we connect with those moving into new positions within our field!
